No more "High End" for me...Back to Reality Audio
After a 3 year roller coaster ride with so called "Audiophile High End" Tube Amps,/Tube Preamps, multi thousand dollar DAC's, Speakers of all shapes and sizes, and several DIY mods. I've settled on what will be my "forever system" and stop chasing a Dragon that I'll never catch. There's more important things in life to worry about. Plus HIgh End crap can be very fickle at times. It has taught me though what sounds good and how to get there and of course how much it will cost new or slightly used.
For the first time, I'm building a system around the Speakers. I'm an electronics Geek so that has ALWAYS come first. I've always done DIY Speakers as well form High School to College to married life (my Wife puts up with A LOT).
My Bose 901 "passion" will be with me forever. I will defend those Sealed Box odd shaped boxes till I do. Any old Geezer will be told off wherever they knock that Brand down. I did it last last week.
Anyways, the list :
To those still chasing the Dragon. Enjoy !
Personally, I'm out on the limb sawing it between me and the trunk to see if I can levitate....*G* It beats the usual pursuits and nobody else seems to be trying to do so...reasonably assured that I won't croak in the attempt anyway. *L* (If one asks '...wtf are you up to?', I'm good with that, too. Stealth is fun in it's way...) 😏 |
@realworldaudio - I really enjoyed your post. I love acoustic guitar and play as a hobby. Recently I found myself thinking my system sounds really good with acoustic instruments, to my ears anyway. I have a couple different amps and preamps so now I can really experiment based on your post! I have wondered about volume levels, i.e. if someone were playing acoustic between my speakers, would my system sound real if the speaker volume was the same as the guitar? Thanks again for the post! |
@moofoo For me a big part of growing towards "natural sound" was going for higher and higher efficiency speakers. The common view of high efficiency speakers is that they give you "more SPL for your watts". However, there's something fundamental happening: a 112dB/Wm loudspeaker gives us the same dynamic resolution (dynamics shading / range) as the live event does. The lower we get with loudspeaker efficiency, the more compressed the reproduction is, and as a consequence it looses "life" compared to the real instrument. A loudspeaker with 102dB/Wm is although considered ultra-efficient but it already imposes 10dB of dynamic compression to what is encoded on the recording, hence, it will already sound a little less live (=more compressed) than the instrument it reflects. 10dB compression in itself is already significant, as the dynamics has been compressed 10 times in power. Sadly, that is on the verge of what is achievable today with a loudspeaker cabinet the size of a healthy refrigerator, and it's about the limit what a normal person can squeeze into a large room. However, looking at an average loudspeaker today of reasonably high sensitivity of 89dB/Wm, we get a whopping 23dB of dynamic compression, that is, we get 0,5% of the actual dynamic range! Even worse, most of the current high end loudspeakers roll today around 83dB/Wm (most of the sensitivity ratings are vastly inflated - when you see dB/2.83V/m & low impedance dip, that's the warning that the dB/Wm is often 5-6dB below the dB/Vm spec.) With 83dB/Wm there is a 29dB dynamic compression, that is, the information is coming at an almost x1000 energy compression. This has two consequences: 1. it will not sound like the real instrument - will have less life, radiancy, freedom in the sound. Even though all the textural information is there, it seems to be "resolved", and images sharply, but the dynamic information is severely compressed. Changing volume does not alter this fact, just changes the SPL at which this compressed material rides. 2. When set to same peak SPL as the real instrument, it will sound way more dense, forceful, "tight", "heavy", and tiring as to achieve the same peak SPL, the median energy output has to be much higher. The sounds that would have been soft are now compressed into the loud band. This makes sounds in the middle of the dynamic range more pronounced, and thereby the listener does experience it a an enhancement of sound quality by hearing fainter sounds more prominent. Yet, the very soft part of the dynamic range is lost, and the very low detail level is gone. This is obvious for experienced listeners, and is perhaps the most important aspect that distances real music instrument sound from recorded / played back compressed material. Cheers, Janos
|
Well, @atmasphere what do you think lightning strikes cause?? 😀 Last rainy season lightning took out two unprotected pieces of gear. One was the cable modem (no protection on the incoming coax) and another was a laptop, which was left charging overnight and I forgot about it. Everything else which was fully protected survived. |
